Big Data Justice: A Case for Regulating the Global Information Commons

Kai Spiekermann, Adam Slavny, David V. Axelsen, Holly Lawford‐Smith

The Journal of Politics · 2020 · 25 citations · 21 references

DOIFull text

Open access

Concepts

TL;DR

AI’s reliance on public data raises questions about ownership and regulation, with producers profiting from freely available data while advocates claim it should remain free. The authors contend that public data should not be free, presenting two objections to the prevailing view. They propose a progressive data‑use tax as a policy tool to mitigate inequality arising from unrestricted data use. The authors find that free data use fosters inequality and violates contributors’ expectations, supporting the regulation and charging of extensive data use.

Abstract

The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) challenges political theorists to think about data ownership and policy makers to regulate the collection and use of public data. AI producers benefit from free public data for training their systems while retaining the profits. We argue against the view that the use of public data must be free. The proponents of unconstrained use point out that consuming data does not diminish its quality and that information is in ample supply. Therefore, they suggest, publicly available data should be free. We present two objections. First, allowing free data use promotes unwanted inequality. Second, contributors of information did not and could not anticipate that their contribution would be used to train AI systems. Our argument implies that managing the "global information commons" and charging for extensive data use is permissible and desirable. We discuss policy implications and propose a progressive data use tax to counter the inequality arising.

References

21